/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20140053]

Ok, all jokes aside. Let's be real for a moment.
What does "dialectically" mean?

[Anonymous No.20140063]

>>20140053
It's when you're using a dialect. Niggerspeak and such.

[Anonymous No.20140067]

>>20140053
In opposition to, as if in argument or debate.

[Anonymous No.20140073]

>>20140053
It's a buzzword philosophers use to sound smarter. For some reason they think it better encapsulates the idea opposition than the word opposition.

[Anonymous No.20140116]

it can simply mean arrived at through dialogue, as in plato. more commonly it refers to two or more things dynamically interacting with one another without a clear cause/effect direction. it can refer to the common misconception of hegel wherein a thing develops in a cycle of generating a force antithetical to itself then becoming synthesized with it becoming a new thing which generates an antithesis etc.. more properly it refers to something like a conception of a thing as generated by contradiction immanent to itself.

[Anonymous No.20140122]

>>20140053
two

[Anonymous No.20140200]

>>20140116
>it can simply mean arrived at through dialogue, as in plato
/thread

>>20140053
an adverb used to specify the means by which came the result(s) from two or more interlocutors arguing in good faith.

[Anonymous No.20140274]

>>20140053
Idk this guy said it was about a synthesis or something

[Anonymous No.20140643]

>>20140274
pseuds on /v/ trigger me to no end when they talk about the """philosophy""" in their shitty oblivion mod

[Anonymous No.20140657]

>>20140053
You want me to be real with you? All modern philosophy is hubris. They wrote it out of narcissism and you read it out of an egotistical desire to be cool. You can't purify your soul by drinking poison. That's all I have to say to you as far as "being real".

[Anonymous No.20140670]

>>20140053
It's a fancy term for backing up a "Nuh uh!" with receipts.
>My dad could totally kick you dad's ass
>Nuh uh, my dad is a black belt in Karate
Dialectic! We all do it.

[Anonymous No.20140754]

Dialectic is the idea of having a conversation in order to arrive at the truth, no matter who ends up right or wrong at the end.

Not the same thing as a debate, where you're trying to convince the other person that you're right.

See: Hegel's thesis-antithesis-synthesis

[Anonymous No.20140772]

>>20140053

dia through
lectic words

[Anonymous No.20140783]

>>20140053
everything

[Anonymous No.20141041]

>>20140754
>See: Hegel's thesis-antithesis-synthesis
This is the pleb reading of Hegel. Patricians know that the thesis and antithesis don't ultimately reconcile into a unitary synthesis but that Being is essentially self-contradictory.

[Anonymous No.20141507]

>>20140274
hegelian dialectics is when you kill people you disagree with

[Anonymous No.20141524]

>>20141041
what's Being?

[Anonymous No.20141553]

>>20141524
Non-Being with extra steps

[Anonymous No.20141589]

>>20141041
So what's the point? Useless and made-up.

[Anonymous No.20141631]

>>20141589
dialectical thought—understanding a thing's identity as constituted by internal contradiction—is the only mode of investigation truly adequate to questions of subjectivity, society, and art.

[Anonymous No.20141686]

>>20141631
ooooh i ok i get it, it's like how i'm a xenophile but also a racist, a massive simp but also a misogynist, based but also a retard... and that's okay
a kinda similar idea, "Caledonian Antisyzygy" is found in Scottish lit crit, descibing the inherent contradictions of the Scottish character
>we find at closer scanning that this cohesion, at least in formal expression and in choice of material, is only apparent, that the literature is remarkably varied, and that it becomes, under the stress of foreign influence and native division and reaction, almost a zigzag of contradictions. The antithesis need not, however, disconcert us. Perhaps in the very combination of opposites— what either of the two Sir Thomases, of Norwich and Cromarty, might have been willing to call ' the Caledonian antisyzygy'—we have a reflection of the contrasts which the Scot shows at every turn, in his political and ecclesiastical history, in his polemical restlessness, in his adaptability, which is another way of saying that he has made allowance for new conditions, in his practical judgement, which is the admission that two sides of the matter have been considered. If therefore Scottish history and life are, as an old northern writer said of something else, "varied with a clean contrair spirit," we need not be surprised to find that in his literature the Scot presents two aspects which appear contradictory. Oxymoron was ever the bravest figure, and we must not forget that disorderly order is order after all.

[Anonymous No.20141690]

>>20141041
Contradictories arise out of unity and do not resolve, the patrician Platonic take.

[Anonymous No.20142072]

>>20140073
Opposition is a noun but they don't say dialect when they mean opposition. Anyway, this is a pretentious academia lingo hate thread now, I nominate "epistomologically" as the absolute worst.

[Anonymous No.20142074]

>>20142072
Cope, seethe, and dialect

[Anonymous No.20142102]

>>20140053
>- Let's consider A. We know that a change in A causes a change in B, which affects D. So, we can predict D from A by considering B.
>- But the change in A also causes a change in C, which also affects D. So you can't correctly predict D from A by considering just B. You need to consider both B and C. More than that, D by itself changes A, so~
>- Well maybe, but that's not the point, we don't consider C right now, and the reverse relationship of D to A, we're like, leaving it outside the parentheses.
>- Why?
>- Because it's more convenient that way. And if we want C, we can just do the same and leave B out of the picture.
>- Why?
>- BECAUSE IT IS MORE CONVENIENT!
>- It's not tho, we have to consider the entire relationship if we need to understand the entire relationship, even if it makes the whole thing more complicated - it does so because the relationship itself really is complicated.

[Anonymous No.20142105]

>>20140053
Inserted anally.

[Anonymous No.20142107]

>>20142105
Negative Dialectics = pooping?

[Anonymous No.20142119]

>>20142107
Inserted orally.
God, you guys need to read some theory.

[Anonymous No.20142247]

>>20140053
Mushy reasoning and playing association games between a dualistic principal of it’s choice. To put it simply, every notion every concept has a counter part, Every ideas opposite is just the absence of the idea itself. Any perceived difference is a deep connection. And in this way the universe is able to be unified with restraint put in place by these laws.

Problems with dialects, it gets absolutely trounced by the scientific method and use of the question How? and more and more specifics will dismantle any dialectical argument. Basically dialects is masturbating and that makes some idiots feel special.

[Anonymous No.20142260]

My Grandma speaks in dialectics, muh GF (Asian) barely understands a word she says.

[Anonymous No.20142290]

>>20140053

[Anonymous No.20142297]

>>20142290

[Anonymous No.20142306]

>>20140053
Dialectic is using your ability to think logically on your ability to think logically. It's meta-thought about how you think.

[Anonymous No.20142309]

>>20142247
>Every ideas opposite is just the absence of the idea itself.
Oof, that's an extremely Christian assertion. I think you need to reword what you're trying to say.

[Anonymous No.20142951]

>>20140053
Thesis, antithesis and synthesis.
If you need more than three words to explain it you’re a pseud.